N.Y. Dangerous LLC v. Librot

Decision Date07 December 2021
Docket NumberCase Nos. 2019-2817, 2019-21211,14801,Index No. 655839/17
Citation200 A.D.3d 467,155 N.Y.S.3d 71 (Mem)
Parties NEW YORK DANGEROUS LLC et al., Plaintiffs–Appellants, v. Adam LIBROT, Defendant–Respondent.
CourtNew York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

Leon Feingold, appellant pro se and for New York Dangerous LLC, appellant.

Adam Librot, respondent pro se.

Acosta, P.J., Gische, Webber, Friedman, Kennedy, JJ.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Gerald Lebovits, J.), entered on or about March 14, 2019, which denied plaintiffsmotion to vacate an order, same court and Justice, entered January 25, 2019, dismissing the complaint pursuant to 22 NYCRR 202.27 for their failure to appear at two preliminary conferences, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiffs failed to demonstrate a reasonable excuse for their failure to appear at two scheduled court conferences (see 22 NYCRR 202.27 ; Biton v. Turco, 88 A.D.3d 519, 930 N.Y.S.2d 876 [1st Dept. 2011], lv dismissed 30 N.Y.3d 1081, 69 N.Y.S.3d 847, 92 N.E.3d 1237 [2018] ). Although the preliminary conferences were not electronically filed on NYSCEF, the e-filing status was "full participation recorded," i.e., all parties provided their email contact information (NYSCEF Index No. 655839/2017). As the motion court observed, plaintiff Feingold, an admitted attorney, "does not deny that he was notified under the e-track system." Thus, Feingold's excuse that he effectively failed to check his email, not once but twice, is unavailing (see Bank of N.Y. v. Mohammed, 130 A.D.3d 1419, 1420, 14 N.Y.S.3d 783 [3rd Dept. 2015] ). Plaintiffs also failed to demonstrate a meritorious cause of action (see Biton, 88 A.D.3d at 519, 930 N.Y.S.2d 876 ).

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT